Originally Posted by Avantenor
People today also like artificial literature, but they wouldn't buy a blank copy Shakespeare or Goethe anymore. The use of a language and orchestration changes over the time. Also does the presentation of a game story. 3D isn't only a technical innovation, it's a dramaturgical element. Using cinematics in ingame engine, or - another example - transfering the whole print text into full voice overs wouldn't make PsT more or less intellectual, but could add a whole bunch of new, younger fans to that kind of gaming.
I think most of us grew up with 2D gaming. We all decided what kind of games we want to play, when 3D was right at the beginning. But meanwhile there is a new generation of gamers, that don't have that experience and surely don't want to go back to "the old days" they don't really know and they wouldn't feel comfortable with. PsT today couldn't be done in the way it has been done anno 1999. But there are new ways of game design, that could produce another game in that spirit. And that people would be willing to pay for. Making the product comfortable for the new kind of audience, without removing it's core strenghts.

Yes, I agree. Torment is actually suitable for a modern presentation, because its strengths lie in the story and plot - not the gameplay. Had the gameplay been more sophisticated, it would have had less of a chance of being remade in true spirit. That's why Bioshock was a simplified System Shock with a story that was easier to digest (and unfortunately very easy to pick apart) - but it suited the modern audience much better than a game with equally sophisticated gameplay, or heaven forbid: an evolution of that gameplay.

However, it would require something very different than the interactive book format that Torment was - and as such, I'm sceptical what company would be qualified to make a modern but faithful game.

People are no different today than they always were, as in the majority want easy-to-digest entertainment, because the majority is casual. We should be pleased with the few decades we had when gaming was in its infancy, and the playerbase was mostly enthusiastic fans - also known as hardcore gamers. Those days are long gone, and today it's an industry much like the music or movie business.

Many indie developers tend to stick to "the good old times". That's not the way it works, imho. I don't see any impulses coming from that corner of game development.

Give it time.

Indie gaming is just beginning, and it's only recently the market as a whole started to realise the shift towards mainstream big business. People need to catch up and appreciate that there's still a sizable "hardcore" audience that is willing to invest in a deep and complex title. As long as the indies understand that profit will be modest. I think that's the key to successful indie development that will yield titles resembling the golden stuff from the 90s.